Main navigation

political betting

With nearly £90M matched already, Betfair’s Next President market is well on course to become the biggest political betting event of all-time. This main market, however, is only the tip of the iceberg.

For the serious political bettor, there’s a bet to cover pretty much every angle. That includes odds on every state, the percentage totals of each candidate, turnout and the margin of victory. All will be traded in-running on election day itself. Here’s my selection of the best current bets and most interesting markets to watch in the days ahead, with a view towards trading.

Clinton is tremendous value on the electoral college handicap markets

For those of us already on the long-term favourite, the last few days have been rather worrying. Opinion polls were already showing Hillary Clinton’s big lead evaporating before FBI director James Comey threw an October Surprise into the mix last Friday.

Although evidence of the latest e-mail controversy actually hurting her electorally is thin, the market trajectory seems to assume it will eventually take its toll. At 1.4, she has drifted back to around a mark last seen after the first TV debate. Disregarding the potential for a late switch in voting sentiment, though, everything we know about state polls and early voting suggests that is a value odds-on bet.

Fighting against a backdrop of terrible polls, Donald Trump desperately needed a gamechanging, momentum-reversing performance in last night’s third and final debate.

He didn’t produce it.

Compared to the two previous debates and perhaps above expectations, Trump actually performed pretty well. Focus groups of undecided voters on both CNN and CBS said he edged it and, live-tweeting for Betfair, I felt he earned at least a draw.

1) Another contentious debate but higher quality, less abusive than the last one. Trump held his own and did better than expectations.

There were other positive indicators from the snap verdicts. CNN’s debate-viewer poll – which they acknowledge is slightly skewed towards the Democrats – showed a closer margin than last time at 52-39 to Clinton. On issues and authenticity, he earned a virtual tie.

However other key measurements indicated that Trump’s efforts were in vain. Asked whether the debate made them likelier to vote for either candidate, 23% said Trump, 22% Clinton and 55% no change. A huge 61-31 majority considered her to have better understanding of the issues. On being prepared for the presidency, Clinton dominated yet again, 59-35.

Therein lies Trump’s fundamental problems – he has never been regarded as qualified or temperamentally fit for office. I wrote before the first debate that he had a brief window to reset that image and improve longstanding unfavorables. Instead he reinforced it, doubled and tripled down afterwards – dealing fatal blows even before the groping tape and sexual assault allegations destroyed his credibility and candidacy.

This state perfectly demonstrates the enormous task faced by any Republican pursuing the presidency nowadays, let alone a divisive candidate like Trump. Prior to Barack Obama, Colorado was reliably red, only voting Democrat once between 1964 and 2008. Now it seems almost naturally Democrat, forming a key part of the Clinton firewall.

Whereas Republicans invariably win Governorships in swing, ‘purple’ states, John Hickenlooper has been successful whilst pursuing a clearly liberal agenda – on gun control, marijuana, gay rights and immigration. A large, growing Hispanic population has altered the electoral maths in the Democrats’ favour, especially against a divisive candidate like Trump.

This really isn’t the ideal state for Trump. Not only must he overcome those systemic challenges, but the Republican revolt against him is stronger here than almost anywhere. It was Colorado delegates, most notably Kendal Unruh, that led the failed insurrection against Trump at the party convention.

Most famous for it’s pivotal ‘first in the nation’ primary, NH is another key plank of Clinton’s firewall. Polls consistently put her ahead but it is worth remembering that she lost this primary to Bernie Sanders, whereas victory on the GOP side propelled Trump towards the nomination, following defeat in the opening Iowa Caucus.

Voters are notoriously independent here, so it is no great surprise to see Gary Johnson’s Libertarian candidacy faring well in the polls and the resilience of his support could prove decisive. There is also a very tight Senate race taking place, in which reluctant, wavering support for Trump from Republican Kelly Ayotte provides an interesting sub-plot.

The Keystone State is probably the most important in this year’s election, as demonstrated by the stream of recent rallies hosted by Trump on the Republican side and both Obamas for the Democrats.

While Trump has never been short of doubters on his own side, he had one strong argument. That he alone had the potential to win struggling rust-belt states with his ‘Make America Great Again’ theme, thus redrawing the electoral college map. No Republican has won here since George H W Bush in 1988.

It is certainly true that defeat here would spell big trouble for Clinton, as these 20 electoral college votes are part of her most straightforward route to 270 – which removes the need for traditional toss-ups like Florida and Ohio. For all Trump’s hype though, she has consistently led polls and, following the first TV debate, opened up leads of 9 and 10%.

Last week I was privileged to make my third appearance on the superb RT show “Watching the Hawks”. This time I was live in the studio, rather than via satellite link, so I got to watch a particularly interesting episode close-up.

In addition to discussing the latest odds to win the presidency, distribution of electoral college votes and the scale of election betting across the industry, I offered a couple of outside bets to keep an eye on. This was the day before the #Trumptapes emerged, so the timing couldn’t have been better!

No US Presidential Election would be complete without at least speculation of the infamous ‘October Surprise’. The gamechanging event, revelation or scandal that transforms the race. Just three days into the month, we already have a prime contender.

On Saturday night, the US media went into a frenzy – even momentarily diverting attention from the much awaited Saturday Night Live Premiere – with the breaking news that Donald Trump’s tax returns had been leaked to the New York Times. The return address on the package was even listed as Trump Tower!

The headlines were certainly eyecatching, revealing that in 1995, Trump declared a whopping $916M loss. Such an enormous loss implies that he may not have paid any federal income tax since. Surrogates such as Rudy Giuliani have been struggling to defend their boss ever since.

Tellingly, nobody from Team Trump has denied the authenticity of them or the charge of not paying federal income tax since. Instead, the likes of Giuliani declare it proves the Republican candidate is a ‘genius’.

Just how many voters are actually moved, or even surprised, remains unclear. It is just the latest piece of a complex jigsaw that investigative journalists have been trying to put together, regarding Trump’s finances and business dealings. Stories about his charitable donations (or lack of), lawsuits, potential conflicts of interest or business failures emerge almost every day.

Slowly but surely liquidity in the various election markets is improving and, as it develops, I’m building my portfolio. Following last week’s bet on Clinton Electoral College Votes, I’ve now added two more pro-Clinton positions on handicap markets, as advised on Twitter yesterday.

To be clear, these are not definitive predictions. Along with my massive position on Clinton to become president, I’m taking a view that the odds will move in her direction as polling day nears and as the market factors in fundamentals such as the electoral college.

If and when they do, the option to hedge between various different markets will become available. For a guide towards what such a strategy may look like, check out the way I played the Brexit markets.

Also, this may be the best time to play, in advance of poll movements in the wake of her one-sided debate victory and a truly terrible news cycle for Trump. As I’ve said throughout, we cannot rule out a Trump implosion – in which case we’ll be sitting very pretty with these bets. Nevertheless for now, my risk is massive.

So why are these bets value? Well, either the electoral college market is wrong or the handicaps are. Because I’ve just taken 3.1 (32%) about Clinton getting 319 electoral college votes or more. Yet the combined odds of 330-359 and 360 plus – 4.0 and 7.0 respectively – equates to 2.55 (39%).

In other words we could back her to win the handicap, then lay (oppose) those two higher bands, guarantee making money while leaving 319-329 as a massive profit where both bets win. And 319-329 is a very realistic range – for example, Obama states minus Iowa; Obama states plus NC, minus Ohio (or OH and IA).

The question, therefore, is which price is wrong – handicap or electoral college? I say it’s the handicap that’s wrong and expect the odds on Clinton -99.5 to shorten significantly in due course. When it does, I’ll be able to cover much of the risk on her to win the presidency and the -49.5 handicap – if I wish to do so.

I’ll make that decision in due course. As I’ve said before, it may be that covering in specific states is the better option.

This is going to be a complex procedure, so feel free to post any questions on here or directly on Twitter to @paulmotty. Here’s a list of every live bet here.

***UPDATE**

I added a further bet on the handicap market last night, advised on Twitter. The profit/loss figures have been amended to account for it.

Rather than one of the specific electoral college vote total markets, as above, I’ve opted to have a saver on the upper range. As advised on Twitter, I’ve backed the Democrats to win 30 or more states. This would certainly cover 360 plus, and could in a dream scenario also land in the 330-359 band.

New #Election2016 bet: 50 units Democrats to win 30 states or more @ 3.0. See next tweet for reasoning.

To be honest, the lack of liquidity in Betfair’s Clinton Electoral College Votes market is frustrating, although I still expect it to liven up. Otherwise, we’re stuck betting with bookmakers who are liable to restrict or ban you for being a shrewd gambler. Nevertheless, here’s my logic.

Regular readers may recall how we made money out of Brexit. The core plan, that set everything up, was backing a narrow win for Remain via the 50-55% band and hedging between handicap markets to create a ‘middle’ of 50-52.5%. That allowed a cover on Leave, that meant we were effectively laying under 55%.

I was always very confident that Remain wouldn’t go above that percentage and once it became clear on the night that it wouldn’t, covering on Leave to ensure the maximum profit was easy.

The electoral college offers a similar opportunity. We can all try and predict the exact distribution of votes by correctly predicting the result of every state, but the margin for error is obviously big.

For example, Obama won 332 votes, which seems a good benchmark to start from as it’s plausible that they all go exactly the same way. The odds taken today imply Clinton has just a 17% chance of getting between 330 and 359. I reckon that’s a big understatement and that the odds will move our way.

However it isn’t an exact prediction. Take one state away and she falls below our band. Add North Carolina’s 15 votes though, and Clinton has room for error.

Plus we know the Trump effect is not uniform, bringing other states into play. If he has a very poor result, Arizona, Georgia and Texas could dramatically alter calculations. On the other hand, Iowa looks a state he could win even on a bad night. Ohio remains a very realistic gain even if losing nationally. If he performed much better than expected, a shock in one of the North-East states cannot be totally dismissed.

So my plan is to build a book, just like Brexit, where I’ve got odds that decrease between now and polling day. My opinion remains that Clinton is on course to win well. That he is going to struggle to win any swing state. 347 – Obama states plus NC – is realistic.

If it looks set to go that way, the 360 or more band might be the right cover to have, in case AZ or one of the other upsets go for her. If closer, I’ll cover on one or more of the lower bands. Or perhaps just cover on a specific swing state or two. Watch this space for updates.

Earlier this month, I visited the Fox Studios to discuss the concept of political betting, past and current US elections and whether these markets represented a superior guide to predicting the result than opinion polls. Here’s the interview with Benjamin Brown.